Evidence of Lexical Priming
http://www.scribd.com/doc/33664352/Evidence-of-Lexical-Priming
http://www.scribd.com/doc/33664352/Evidence-of-Lexical-Priming
I use corpus linguistics very much along the lines of John-Sinclair's"Trust the text". I neither do corpus-assisted research (where a set theoryand a set notion of language is simply proven by bringing in results fromreal (or natural) data nor is it corpus-based research (pretty similar to theabove. However, findings are based on results found by corpora research).
I undertake, I think, the more adventurous and less framework-boundversion: corpus-led
research. This means I approach data not with a fixedidea of what I want to find or how I would call collocational or colligationalelements and structures. Too often, fixed notions and strict classificationshave blinded researchers - and made them miss patterns. I believe thatthe natural occurring language itself provides the answers. Because of this, I am reluctant to use traditional terminology. It seems as if the mostinnocuous item (word) can have different functions and meanings and thatis very much dictated by the item's surroundings. For this reason, "LexicalPriming" is a theory I find extremely helpful.In my research (and, hopefully, very much the focus of my researchcareer) is the spoken word. This is in many ways the harder road to travel:transcribed spoken language is hard to come by and, where it exists,comes in the form of small corpora (very different to written corpora whereresearchers have now access to large chunks of the world wide web).Taping and transcribing one's own corpus is extremely time-consumingand tedious and, where third-party transcripts are being used, differingstandards of transcription can render chunks of information useless.Speech is, however, our primary way of communication and, consequently,it corpora of spoken language should be able to reflect used speech at itspurest. At the same time, spoken language is ideal for corpus-led research,as it is now widely accepted that people, when speaking, adhere todifferent grammatical rules than written text.I compare material from my own corpus - over 100k words of spokenLiverpool English, with two general corpora of spoken English from acrossthe UK. The aim is to find whether a particular (geographical and / orsocio-economic) speech group is primed to use certain key words and keyphrases and ways that differ from an average found used across thecountry. I believe that this has been successful and that that I haveproven that the English spoken in Liverpool is, sometimes subtly,sometimes more obviously, different in its use of the same lexical stock asfound in the general corpora. I see this of evidence that members of onespeech community (Liverpudlians) are primed to use certain items andphrases in ways that are either more or less strongly preferred by otherEnglish speakers in the UK.Michael Pace-Sigge 28/VI/2010
I undertake, I think, the more adventurous and less framework-boundversion: corpus-led
research. This means I approach data not with a fixedidea of what I want to find or how I would call collocational or colligationalelements and structures. Too often, fixed notions and strict classificationshave blinded researchers - and made them miss patterns. I believe thatthe natural occurring language itself provides the answers. Because of this, I am reluctant to use traditional terminology. It seems as if the mostinnocuous item (word) can have different functions and meanings and thatis very much dictated by the item's surroundings. For this reason, "LexicalPriming" is a theory I find extremely helpful.In my research (and, hopefully, very much the focus of my researchcareer) is the spoken word. This is in many ways the harder road to travel:transcribed spoken language is hard to come by and, where it exists,comes in the form of small corpora (very different to written corpora whereresearchers have now access to large chunks of the world wide web).Taping and transcribing one's own corpus is extremely time-consumingand tedious and, where third-party transcripts are being used, differingstandards of transcription can render chunks of information useless.Speech is, however, our primary way of communication and, consequently,it corpora of spoken language should be able to reflect used speech at itspurest. At the same time, spoken language is ideal for corpus-led research,as it is now widely accepted that people, when speaking, adhere todifferent grammatical rules than written text.I compare material from my own corpus - over 100k words of spokenLiverpool English, with two general corpora of spoken English from acrossthe UK. The aim is to find whether a particular (geographical and / orsocio-economic) speech group is primed to use certain key words and keyphrases and ways that differ from an average found used across thecountry. I believe that this has been successful and that that I haveproven that the English spoken in Liverpool is, sometimes subtly,sometimes more obviously, different in its use of the same lexical stock asfound in the general corpora. I see this of evidence that members of onespeech community (Liverpudlians) are primed to use certain items andphrases in ways that are either more or less strongly preferred by otherEnglish speakers in the UK.Michael Pace-Sigge 28/VI/2010
'Research Ideas' 카테고리의 다른 글
| Collocations in Translated Language: (0) | 2012.01.21 |
|---|---|
| Book review: Hoey's Lexical priming (0) | 2012.01.21 |
| Lexical priming and the properties of text (0) | 2012.01.21 |
| Lexical priming (0) | 2012.01.21 |
| The effect of lexical priming on sentence comprehension: An (0) | 2012.01.21 |